ABA Sidesteps Georgia Abortion Debate, Moves Meeting to Chicago
In announcing the 2021 Midyear Meeting site, ABA President Bob Carlson said the board decided to relocate to Chicago “for economic reasons."
June 07, 2019 at 11:56 AM
5 minute read
The American Bar Association on Friday attempted to sidestep a rising controversy over whether to bypass Atlanta as a meeting site in protest of a new Georgia law severely limiting legal abortions.
In announcing the 2021 meeting site, ABA president Bob Carlson said the board decided to relocate to Chicago, where the association is headquartered, “for economic reasons.” The meeting was originally scheduled to convene in Orlando, where the ABA previously met at Disney World.
Carlson said in a public statement released Friday morning that the ABA evaluated 18 cities as possible sites for the February 2021 meeting before settling on Chicago.
The move from Orlando “is a significant savings” that will be passed on to ABA members, said spokesman Matt Cimento. “It's why they decided on Chicago. … The impetus is money.”
The ABA president made no mention of a June 4 letter signed by nearly 250 ABA members asking the board to forego convening in Atlanta in 2021 because of its “new draconian anti-choice” law that the signers said “demonstrates a flagrant disregard for the health and lives of women, as well as contempt for medical professionals who face criminal penalties if they perform an abortion after a fetal heartbeat has been detected.”
Cimento said he couldn't comment on whether the letter influenced the board's decision.
Sources familiar with the board's deliberations said there was no mention of either the protest letter or Atlanta as a possible meeting site and no discussion before the board voted unanimously to relocate to Chicago.
Georgia State Sen. Jen Jordan, an Atlanta attorney who fought to defeat the new abortion law and testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee about the profound impact it would have on women, said Friday that, even if the ABA says economics led it to choose Chicago, “At the end of the day, it is an organization of lawyers who are committed to upholding the rule of law, the Constitution of the United States, and constitutions of various states.”
“It is an economic issue,” she said. “They are not going to spend their money in a state, in a city when they think we are going to push these kinds of policies and these kinds of laws that are counter to the oaths we take as lawyers.”
Jordan said Illinois will likely be cold and snowy in Chicago for the scheduled February 2021 meeting, but the selection sends a message that the members would “rather spend our money in a state that protects women's constitutional rights versus states that don't.”
Jordan also observed that while Chicago may be home to the ABA, the Illinois legislature last week passed a bill establishing a woman's fundamental right to an abortion, and repealing an earlier law that required spousal consent, established waiting periods and criminal penalties for physicians who perform abortions. The bill also states that a fertilized egg, embryo or fetus does not have independent rights. Gov. J.B. Pritzker has pledged to sign the bill.
Even if the ABA doesn't address the abortion issue at all, “It's a tremendous statement” to convene in Illinois in the immediate wake of the new bill's passage, Jordan said. “I think it's super fascinating that's the city they picked. It really does speak volumes.”
The move to Chicago comes three days after nearly 250 ABA members urged the ABA board to shun Atlanta in response to the Georgia General Assembly's passage this year of one of the nation's most restrictive abortion laws.
The letter castigated Georgia and other states for passing laws intended to severely limit and, in some cases, ban abortions in defiance of Roe v. Wade, the 46-year-old U.S. Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion.
“We should not be asking our members to choose between their principles and their professional interest in participating in the mid-year meeting,” the letter said. Its signers, among them lawyers and judges, also suggested that, if the board of governors chose Atlanta, “Many of us will choose principle and forego attendance.”
Georgia's law, signed by Gov. Brian Kemp on May 5, bans most abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected. Fetal heartbeats or its precursor have been detected as early as six weeks, often before a woman knows she is pregnant.
Kemp's office did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Georgia's new law provides limited exceptions for legal abortions in cases that involve rape or incest, but only if the woman reports an assault to police. It also permits abortions if the fetus is not viable or the mother's health is threatened by a medical emergency.
The law is scheduled to take effect Jan. 1.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'A 58-Year-Old Engine That Needs an Overhaul': Judge Wants Traffic Law Amended
3 minute readAppeals Court Removes Fulton DA From Georgia Election Case Against Trump, Others
6 minute readFamily of 'Cop City' Activist Killed by Ga. Troopers Files Federal Lawsuit
5 minute readFulton Judge Rejects Attempt by Trump Campaign Lawyer to Invalidate Guilty Plea in Georgia Election Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250